|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Aug 4, 2014 20:03:50 GMT
With days long timers that can be bought out of with buffs or gems? If so, it is very much exactly like the others, if not worse than some. SO is almost gem free needed for the first 25 levels. Most FB games don't really need you ever buy a game till much later in the game till you are completely sucked in either. Cafe Wars never got a penny for the first few months from me till my food started taking hours to cook, this sounds very similar to Godus with the first few levels have acceptable timers till you are sucked in and then wallop you with the much longer ones to get your cash. I think how we're trying to differentiate ourselves is by always giving the player something to do, rather than blocking activity altogether. Is that something supposed to be fun or relax the frustration that they may no longer be able to proceed along their set goal for that play session? Point being, if a player cannot proceed with what they wanted to do, it doesn't matter if there's something else to do, they'll probably set aside the game either forever or until they can do what they want. There's absolutely no incentive to do anything else if it's not what you want to do, since there are plenty of other games where you can do what you want without any barriers. |
|
|
|
Post by Qetesh on Aug 4, 2014 20:05:08 GMT
With days long timers that can be bought out of with buffs or gems? If so, it is very much exactly like the others, if not worse than some. SO is almost gem free needed for the first 25 levels. Most FB games don't really need you ever buy a game till much later in the game till you are completely sucked in either. Cafe Wars never got a penny for the first few months from me till my food started taking hours to cook, this sounds very similar to Godus with the first few levels have acceptable timers till you are sucked in and then wallop you with the much longer ones to get your cash. I think how we're trying to differentiate ourselves is by always giving the player something to do, rather than blocking activity altogether. I can only speak for the half of dozen F2p that I have played but none of them block the player from playing, they just make it a living hell without it, just as days long timers do. I compare this to F2p because in Farmville you use "accelerants" to cut back your timers. In cafe world you use "accelerants" to cut back time for food needed to cook, in SO you use "accelerants" to cut back time needed for explorers to find mines, troops to produce, buffs to produce to cut back timers and pretty much almost anything else the DEVs of that game could think of each month. None of them block you in any way, but without spending money on gems you find yourself wanting to rip your hair out much like Godus has done to it's players by making such insanely long timers. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 4, 2014 20:14:30 GMT
So, are theses buffs meant to be for use to sell gems in mobile? If so, what happens in the PC version? This is why I asked this to begin with, gems and buffs in F2p are linked to make money. Is this a mechanic in Godus mobile and if so how will it not be in PC , since PC is not a F2p and yet the PC version is also not to be a watered down version of the mobile? Can you guarantee this won't be a F2p element at all? If not why are you debating this with me? There are 'buffs' in the game that are available to everyone. Regardless of gems. These buffs include (but are not limited to) trees that improve belief generation of nearby buildings and will probably include (as reported) 'rivers' buffing nearby farms. As such, this mechanic atleast is entirely non-F2P related. Aside from that the mobile version does have gems which allow you to buy 'buffs' apparently. Which in turn allow you to speed up certain processes within the game. These are completely seperate from the abovementioned mechanics however. Whether or not the final PC release will have a properly rebalanced gameplay mechanic to compensate for the lack of gems or to alter the gameplay experience significantly enough to make it more enjoyable for any PC players (such as myself) will remain to be seen. As we just have promises and speculations on that part for now. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Aug 4, 2014 21:20:21 GMT
What danjal said.
I thinks it easy to tell a bad mechanic (f2p) from a good one. A f2p buff mechanic makes you repeated click something as a chore rather than a strategic decision. Take the fountain that 22cans suggested - you pay belief to place a fountain then click it to buff your followers. As described this is a bad f2p mechanic because it's a chore. You can improve it by making it automated and having a trade off. That way the player is making a strategic decision about where to place it in order to ensure efficiency. The trade off should never be can I be bothered clicking on this again.
Good games have an interface that minimises clicking but requires the player to think deeply about any clicks, bad games have lots of clicking that doesn't require any thought. Every time we've criticised GODUS it's because we think the mechanics involve the later.
I'm playing a lot of civ5 atm. There is so much thought in every decision and yet I click very few times. Even decisions about which direction to scout. If we have choices in GODUS about making rivers and lakes, growing forests and placing buildings in smart ways that will be a major step towards and intelligent game. Fingers crossed.
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Aug 4, 2014 21:31:37 GMT
*chews popcorn*
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 4, 2014 21:32:24 GMT
Growing forests? Now that'd be interesting. Instead of purely landscaping or gardening, being able to actually *grow* vegetation back (and eventually have it influence wildlife and other elements).
Its those kinds of interconnected systems, working together in a natural fashion (no clickfests or swipefests) with the added concept of choice and consequence that make an interesting title.
And I'll admit to that much, if I take a step back and I look at Godus as it was on 'launch', then as it was after the period of silence and then as it will be when you include the new settlement mechanic (and potentially dynamic water as described). Than the game has gone through improvements.
Its a 3 steps forward, 2 steps backwards method of progression, but there is a grudgingly slow pace forward. (So its not all bad.)
I'm really annoyed that I had to put off writing out that in-depth suggestion (v3, v1 and v2 being available on the steam boards) due to personal circumstances - but I'm glad to see that atleast some of the things that I've had in mind are atleast partially making it into the game already.
|
|
splitterwind
Master
Posts: 149 
I don't like: Ignoring a unpleasant question or answering with something that is only loosely related or way to vague to actually answer something. Mods that Cherry-pick in discussions. Banning people for minor offenses.
|
Post by splitterwind on Aug 4, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
I associate buffs with strategy games and rpgs, not F2P games.
The are barely any games in these genres without buffs and they are also common in other genres in one way or another.
They might be abused by F2P games but that doesn't make them inherently evil, it's hard to imagine a complex strategy game without them.
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Aug 5, 2014 14:16:10 GMT
Growing forests? Now that'd be interesting. Instead of purely landscaping or gardening, being able to actually *grow* vegetation back (and eventually have it influence wildlife and other elements). Its those kinds of interconnected systems, working together in a natural fashion (no clickfests or swipefests) with the added concept of choice and consequence that make an interesting title. This was something widely discussed and suggested way back in November 2013, in this Steam topic thread started by Jack. I had assumed that the "God Seed" power released with v2.0 stemmed from that discussion; although it didn't quite match the expectations of those suggestions, and seemed quiet under-realized, it did make us hopeful that the design and development of features would continue on that path - and that was six months ago. It really hasn't progressed beyond, or expended on, the potential depth of that idea. Still hopeful, and looking forward to seeing what's in this impending update, though I just don't expect to be "wowed". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 2:35:05 GMT
Growing forests? Now that'd be interesting. Instead of purely landscaping or gardening, being able to actually *grow* vegetation back (and eventually have it influence wildlife and other elements). Its those kinds of interconnected systems, working together in a natural fashion (no clickfests or swipefests) with the added concept of choice and consequence that make an interesting title. This was something widely discussed and suggested way back in November 2013, in this Steam topic thread started by Jack. I had assumed that the "God Seed" power released with v2.0 stemmed from that discussion; although it didn't quite match the expectations of those suggestions, and seemed quiet under-realized, it did make us hopeful that the design and development of features would continue on that path - and that was six months ago. It really hasn't progressed beyond, or expended on, the potential depth of that idea. Still hopeful, and looking forward to seeing what's in this impending update, though I just don't expect to be "wowed". I sincerely hope that 22cans isn't withholding all these great ideas that are so prevalent on many of the forums with the intent to sell them as DLC later on. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 6, 2014 11:02:13 GMT
It always remains a possibility, but something to keep in mind there is that if they intend to keep the PC and mobile versions linked (even slightly) - they'd have to find a way to get this DLC marketable on the mobile side aswell.
While it is a very relevant question and I'd love to hear Matthew or George elaborate on this (or inquire what the internal intentions are on this matter), I highly doubt that they've planned that for ahead yet. A bit of a "Don't count your chickens before the eggs are hatched." kind of mentality would be applicable here.
|
|
Casinha
Master
Posts: 217
Pledge level: Partner
|
Post by Casinha on Aug 6, 2014 11:06:09 GMT
Sure, but most people now equate them to F2p, just like the word "gems" did not originate from F2p but is now equated with it. You guys seem to want to veer from the profile of F2p but yet you keep using terms that are very much linked to the average F2p and sorry. "farming buffs" screams Farmville and regardless of what you say, you know that. I have to disagree with you here. Personally, I've never played FarmVille or the like, however I do play a lot of Diablo, hence my use of the term in this context. I don't think it's fair to extrapolate your experience with term to cover the whole of the community (myself included) and certainly not the design team. Please bear in mind I'm just using a commonly understood term to describe a potential feature - I could have easily said "improved", "boosted", "sped up" or "increased rate of yield" and it would have meant the exact same thing. After all, I wrote that post in my own style, not the design team's. Yeah, I would never think of a F2P game if the word "buff" was mentioned. The first thing I would think of is how awesome my cleric is in a game I'm currently playing (I wipe out undead like it's nobody's business). The second thing I would think of is people being muscly. The third thing I would think of polishing things. |
|
|
|
Post by Monkeythumbz on Aug 6, 2014 12:44:15 GMT
While it is a very relevant question and I'd love to hear Matthew or George elaborate on this (or inquire what the internal intentions are on this matter), I highly doubt that they've planned that for ahead yet. A bit of a "Don't count your chickens before the eggs are hatched." kind of mentality would be applicable here. Yes, indeed so. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 18:51:00 GMT
While it is a very relevant question and I'd love to hear Matthew or George elaborate on this (or inquire what the internal intentions are on this matter), I highly doubt that they've planned that for ahead yet. A bit of a "Don't count your chickens before the eggs are hatched." kind of mentality would be applicable here. Yes, indeed so. It has become more and more prevalent for studios to hold back amazing/fulfilling bits of code, art, assests, etc in hopes of releasing desirous DLC after the fact. I'm hopeful that this wont be the case considering the nature of the "investement" us Kickstarter/EA backers made. It would be kind of a slap in the face to see much discussed and desired functionality presented long after the fact at an additional cost. |
|
|
|
Post by rubgish on Aug 6, 2014 18:59:57 GMT
I really hope it doesn't end up down the DLC route. Firstly I don't think it fits the game at all, you've got an expansive persistent world going on where everyone can play with each other and do things like trade etc, so if you end up with people running different levels of DLC that becomes way more complicated and makes the experience worse. As an addendum to that, I think they'll probably make less money doing DLC packs than they would with other revenue models, specifically selling vanity upgrades.
By vanity upgrades, I mean things like clothing for followers, special follower animations, unique building styles etc. that don't change gameplay but let you customise your game and show off to your friends in Hubworld or when they visit your homeland.
I also do recall reading/hearing Peter talk about wanting to continue to organically grow the game after the fixed release date, so that the game is never really 'done', but is constantly evolving. I might be making that up though, so please do correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qetesh on Aug 6, 2014 19:11:16 GMT
I try not to specifically point out and target individuals for their opinions, even when they get a little trollish or borderline offensive, but Denny Crane is really starting to become a fairly obnoxious and offensive nuisance. I use to find his comedic pseudo-persona somewhat amusing - even if a bit unusual and often off-putting - as he managed to add semi-intelligent levity along with edgy crass remarks and viewpoints; but he's gone a bit too far over the edge lately. He's specifically avoiding attacking individuals by making broad judgemental statements about the entire comminity; though mostly generalizing stereotypes about women and nerds, and in favor of the more positive player base. Although he seems to be an equal opportunity offender - which in the right situation and done properly is amusing - but his relentlessness seems to know no boundaries, along with obvious attempts to skirt the rules by indirectly denouncing individuals with sweepingly openended statements. And somehow he continues to get a free pass, and I believe this to be a gross oversight. If you can believe it, I've even been banned (once) for a far less offense (without so much as a warning, warrented or not). I try to be a fair, patient and even-handed person, and I have tried to stay quiet about my personal feelings about the matter, however, his recent comments are reaching my last nerve. Please take another look at his comment history and being more balanced in the scrutiny of his words, compared to how you treat others. Oh, also; in fairness, I don't think you should call specific people out and warn/flog them in public - that's what PM's are for. Instead, try to stick to the general warnings about forum rules; even saying, "Please don't make me start using the ban-hammer!" or, "If you can't behave, I'll lock this thread. Please try to be fair and nice." is usually sufficient... at least in other forums. Thanks for your understanding. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...............I did mention sharpening my blade of banning and preparing the dungeon, does that count?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 20:09:50 GMT
I really hope it doesn't end up down the DLC route. Firstly I don't think it fits the game at all, you've got an expansive persistent world going on where everyone can play with each other and do things like trade etc, so if you end up with people running different levels of DLC that becomes way more complicated and makes the experience worse. As an addendum to that, I think they'll probably make less money doing DLC packs than they would with other revenue models, specifically selling vanity upgrades. By vanity upgrades, I mean things like clothing for followers, special follower animations, unique building styles etc. that don't change gameplay but let you customise your game and show off to your friends in Hubworld or when they visit your homeland. I also do recall reading/hearing Peter talk about wanting to continue to organically grow the game after the fixed release date, so that the game is never really 'done', but is constantly evolving. I might be making that up though, so please do correct me if I am wrong. I'm skeptical... I could very easily see them doing something like "Oh lol, Space Age Content is DLC, u can has shiny space cottages and eleventeen layers per click for only $5!" EDIT: Let it be known I have no problem with selling vanity items (LOL, DOTA2, etc) that don't effect game play (e.g. non pay-to-win items) but when Godus game play very nearly centers around "vanity" you could make an argument either way I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by muumipeikko on Aug 6, 2014 22:41:42 GMT
To be honest I would have no issue paying a small additional fee for each age/level. In the old days you might buy an expansion disk such as the promised lands so I don't really see much difference. It's actually a great win-win model as great developers who produce a great products are rewarded and encouraged to produce more with more revenue from happy customers who are keen to consume more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qetesh on Aug 6, 2014 23:03:38 GMT
To be honest I would have no issue paying a small additional fee for each age/level. In the old days you might buy an expansion disk such as the promised lands so I don't really see much difference. It's actually a great win-win model as great developers who produce a great products are rewarded and encouraged to produce more with more revenue from happy customers who are keen to consume more. I also have no problem putting money forward to buy a quality game upfront that has no monetization in game except for a superficial store. I spent hundreds of dollars on the Sims and all their expansion packs but it was worth it. I never paid a penny after the original purchases. I also have no problem with paying 15 dollars a month for Wow and again I pay not a penny on top of that monthly rate to play a great game. Make a great game and people won't have a problem paying for it. If your game needs in any way to have in store purchases to make the game fun, then quite frankly, why would I ever want to play it? Games are supposed to be a treat for you not a hassle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 2:23:02 GMT
I though this article was mildly relevant: Kotaku |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 7, 2014 9:36:44 GMT
To be honest I would have no issue paying a small additional fee for each age/level. In the old days you might buy an expansion disk such as the promised lands so I don't really see much difference. It's actually a great win-win model as great developers who produce a great products are rewarded and encouraged to produce more with more revenue from happy customers who are keen to consume more. I *DO* have a problem with that. On the simple basis that that would go against the game they said they'd be making with my money. If that had been their plan from the start and they'd have been open and clear about it, sure - I'd have no problems with that. I would never have bought the game because I'd have no interest in that, but I'd have no problems with it in and of itself. However selling a product with a certain price and description, only to turn around after the transaction is completed to say: "Here is half the product, if you want the rest you'll have to pay extra." No, sorry but I'm not going to accept that - no matter how GOOD the game is. I have NO problem with quality DLC and expansions (cosmetic DLC is something I consider to be a waste of money in most cases), but I do want to know what I'm getting into. Not to be told afterwards that they made a bit of a mistake in their plans, that they now need extra money and if I would be so kind as to shove over the rest of my bank-account. |
|
Aug 21, 2024 19:32:37 GMT
Aug 21, 2024 19:32:37 GMT
